Tweet
FINAL DECISION SHOULD BE MADE BY THE NKR PEOPLE AND AUTHORITIES
Aysor.am
Friday,February 18
Investigating the report of the International Crisis Group (ICG)
entitled 'Armenia and Azerbaijan: preventing war', one automatically
comes to the conclusion that it was written exclusively for convincing
Armenia to 'soften' its positions in the negotiation process, in
particular, on the issue of the final status of Nagorno Karabakh.
As we know, the positions of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic in the
negotiation process are presented today by the Republic of Armenia,
in the part delegated to it by the NKR. But, all the actors of the
peacemaking process, as well as the public sector, which is interested
in the peaceful settlement of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict,
including the ICG, must consider the fact that the final decision
should be made by the NKR people and authorities.
Another matter is the fairness of the report, which is written
thousands of kilometers from Nagorno Karabakh and the authors of which
haven't visited the NKR at all, even for the sake of propriety. Let
alone the fact that recently, Director of the ICG European Program
Sabina Freiser has settled down in Istanbul, from where, basing on
the publications in the mass media and often on unreal data, gives
recommendations to the conflicting parties. But, only one visit to
the NKR is enough for both comprehending the essence of the conflict
and making sure of the Republic's efficiency and viability.
Actually, the ICG offers to settle the conflict's consequences and
not the conflict itself, which just adds fuel to the fire in the
conditions of extreme tension between the parties' societies. Sabina
Freiser, maybe without realizing this, creates a new crisis situation,
which, in fact, the Azerbaijani-Turkish tandem seeks for attempting
to resolve on the quiet the issue in its own way. It isn't accidental
that Freiser assigns Ankara the role of the basic regulator in the
region and a mediator in the Karabakh issue settlement. So, it is time
to rename the International Crisis Group into Crisis Creation Group.
Surely, those in Artsakh share the ICG concerns about the possible war
resumption in any moment, which will lead to unprecedented destructive
consequences for the entire region. But, similar reports should note
the specific creators of the emerged explosive situation. The tension
on the contact-line is the result of Azerbaijan's purposeful policy for
the recent years. In the conditions of the increasing militant rhetoric
and moods in Azerbaijan, the soft position of the mediators and foreign
states' representatives is strange, while they had to flatly condemn
President Aliev long ago, calling upon him to refuse of the policy of
threats and to negotiate with the basic party to the conflict - the
Nagorno Karabakh Republic. Unfortunately, the ICG proposals cannot
resolve principle conflicts. The tactics of small concessions in
favor of the aggressive party will only whet its appetite.
War should be opposed by the NKR recognition and not by signing a
frame agreement or other half measures. Speeding up the signing of an
agreement on the basic principles, without the detailed elaboration
of all its key provisions, will become 'a delayed action mine' under
the entire peace process.
In the current situation, the soonest realization of
confidence-building measures, both military and civic, is needed. The
international community should establish direct relations with Nagorno
Karabakh. The NKR integration into the international processes is
about the only tool in the international community's arsenal for
resisting the situation's running into a new war. The international
community's ignoring of the NKR in favor of Azerbaijan only strengthens
the latter's confidence of its own right to new aggression.
The international community should not repeat its mistake made in early
1990s, when the recognition of Azerbaijan's right to self-determination
and rejection of Nagorno Karabakh's similar right were accepted by
Azerbaijan as a carte blanche for realizing wide-scale aggression
against the NKR and suppressing its people's will. Isn't it time to
learn a lesson from the past?
From: A. Papazian
Aysor.am
Friday,February 18
Investigating the report of the International Crisis Group (ICG)
entitled 'Armenia and Azerbaijan: preventing war', one automatically
comes to the conclusion that it was written exclusively for convincing
Armenia to 'soften' its positions in the negotiation process, in
particular, on the issue of the final status of Nagorno Karabakh.
As we know, the positions of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic in the
negotiation process are presented today by the Republic of Armenia,
in the part delegated to it by the NKR. But, all the actors of the
peacemaking process, as well as the public sector, which is interested
in the peaceful settlement of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict,
including the ICG, must consider the fact that the final decision
should be made by the NKR people and authorities.
Another matter is the fairness of the report, which is written
thousands of kilometers from Nagorno Karabakh and the authors of which
haven't visited the NKR at all, even for the sake of propriety. Let
alone the fact that recently, Director of the ICG European Program
Sabina Freiser has settled down in Istanbul, from where, basing on
the publications in the mass media and often on unreal data, gives
recommendations to the conflicting parties. But, only one visit to
the NKR is enough for both comprehending the essence of the conflict
and making sure of the Republic's efficiency and viability.
Actually, the ICG offers to settle the conflict's consequences and
not the conflict itself, which just adds fuel to the fire in the
conditions of extreme tension between the parties' societies. Sabina
Freiser, maybe without realizing this, creates a new crisis situation,
which, in fact, the Azerbaijani-Turkish tandem seeks for attempting
to resolve on the quiet the issue in its own way. It isn't accidental
that Freiser assigns Ankara the role of the basic regulator in the
region and a mediator in the Karabakh issue settlement. So, it is time
to rename the International Crisis Group into Crisis Creation Group.
Surely, those in Artsakh share the ICG concerns about the possible war
resumption in any moment, which will lead to unprecedented destructive
consequences for the entire region. But, similar reports should note
the specific creators of the emerged explosive situation. The tension
on the contact-line is the result of Azerbaijan's purposeful policy for
the recent years. In the conditions of the increasing militant rhetoric
and moods in Azerbaijan, the soft position of the mediators and foreign
states' representatives is strange, while they had to flatly condemn
President Aliev long ago, calling upon him to refuse of the policy of
threats and to negotiate with the basic party to the conflict - the
Nagorno Karabakh Republic. Unfortunately, the ICG proposals cannot
resolve principle conflicts. The tactics of small concessions in
favor of the aggressive party will only whet its appetite.
War should be opposed by the NKR recognition and not by signing a
frame agreement or other half measures. Speeding up the signing of an
agreement on the basic principles, without the detailed elaboration
of all its key provisions, will become 'a delayed action mine' under
the entire peace process.
In the current situation, the soonest realization of
confidence-building measures, both military and civic, is needed. The
international community should establish direct relations with Nagorno
Karabakh. The NKR integration into the international processes is
about the only tool in the international community's arsenal for
resisting the situation's running into a new war. The international
community's ignoring of the NKR in favor of Azerbaijan only strengthens
the latter's confidence of its own right to new aggression.
The international community should not repeat its mistake made in early
1990s, when the recognition of Azerbaijan's right to self-determination
and rejection of Nagorno Karabakh's similar right were accepted by
Azerbaijan as a carte blanche for realizing wide-scale aggression
against the NKR and suppressing its people's will. Isn't it time to
learn a lesson from the past?
From: A. Papazian